§ MR. T. LOUGH (Islington, W.)I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether he has any confirmation of the statement made by Dr. Bridges in 1889, and confirmed by the Poor Law Schools Inquiry Committee, that from 63 to 64 per cent. of the children in pauper schools, are "ins and outs;" if so, what steps have the Local Government Board taken to effect a classification of these children, so that they may not mix freely with the permanent children and morally and physically contaminate them; and, is it a fact that only two Boards, and those in conjunction, out of the 27 in London have provided separate accommodation for this class of children?
§ MR. CHAPLINThe hon. Member appears to be under an entire misapprehension as to the effect of the statements in the reports of Dr. Bridges and of the Committee on Poor Law Schools. Dr. Bridges did not state that from 63 to 64 per cent. of the children in Poor Law Schools were "ins and outs," but that in the year 1889 the number of discharges from these schools gave the percentage referred to. The report of the Committee shows that out of a total of 14,282 children 905 were admitted to the schools more than once within the year, and that of that number only 248 were admitted more than twice during the year. The Local Government Board have not called upon the different Boards of Guardians to provide separate accommodation for the children of the class referred to, nor am I prepared to say that it is necessary that they should be brought up by themselves. The managers of the Kensington and Chelsea School District are the only metropolitan authority which have provided an intermediate school (an arrangement which I fully admit has many advantages), but this school is not in any way limited to children of the "in and out" class, as all children are sent to this school before being passed on to the main district school.